A Letter to Nicholas Kristof

10 reasons why his recent column is off the mark.

You recently wrote a column in The New York Times entitled “Is Israel Its Own Worst Enemy?” Asserting that yours is “an act of friendship,” you unleashed a torrent of criticism against Israel, claiming, among other angry accusations, that the Jewish state is “endangered most by its leaders and maximalist stance.”

I beg to differ. And no, I don't do so as an opponent of a two-state agreement or a fan of settlements throughout the West Bank. I happen to be neither.

While I've never for a moment argued that Israel should be walled off from critical scrutiny, I simply think you've spun a narrative which is highly selective in its purported analysis.

Stripped to its bare minimum, you believe that peace with the Palestinians would be just around the corner if only Israel had enlightened leadership today.

Yes, it's true another step toward building within Gilo, a well-developed Jerusalem neighborhood, was just taken and the timing was unhelpful.

But, in your column, you noted: “Every negotiator knows the framework of a peace agreement.” Those negotiators all understand that Gilo will remain part of Israel in any conceivable deal.

No, I'm not one of those you disparage as believing that “Jerusalem must all belong to Israel in any peace deal.” But I do know that, in any final agreement, Jerusalem will necessarily look different from it did on the eve of the 1967 Six-Day War, taking into account historical and demographic realities.

But what's most striking is that you insulate the Palestinian Authority (PA) from any responsibility for the current impasse.

While going after Israel with a two-by-four, and grotesquely implying that “hard-liners like Netanyahu” are to be lumped together with “hard-liners like Hamas,” the PA gets a free pass.

Is that because you genuinely believe they're squeaky clean, or rather because, as the political cliché goes, they're the “weaker party” and, therefore, need to be coddled?

Either way, you're missing an essential part of the story you're seeking to describe.

First, why isn't the PA at the bargaining table across from Israel? President Abbas was there till early 2009, when, it should be noted, neither side imposed preconditions on the other to pursue those talks. Importantly as well, the Israelis put a far-reaching two-state deal on that table – not the first such offer, by the way – only to have it once again rebuffed.

Anything to be learned from that experience?

Second, if the Palestinians can now seek to impose preconditions on Israel for a resumption of talks, why shouldn't Israel be able to do the same?

Moreover, when the prime minister you vilify became Israel's first leader to agree to a moratorium on settlement building for ten months, where were the Palestinians?

Third, did you catch President Abbas' speech at the UN General Assembly on September 23, as part of his unilateral UN gambit? If so, would you characterize it as offering an olive branch? If you were an Israeli, irrespective of President Clinton's unbecoming attempt at ethno-religious categorizing of Israeli citizens, would you take comfort from the Palestinian leader's fiery words?

Fourth, did you by chance see President Abbas' op-ed, on May 15, in your newspaper? Did you notice his rewriting of Middle East history, which the fact checkers somehow missed? Was that piece meant to send an encouraging note to Israel, the other half of the equation, about the PA's credibility as a peace partner?

Fifth, did you read President Abbas' comment, in early September: “We are going to complain that as Palestinians we have been under occupation for 63 years.”?

That, of course, takes the “occupation” back to 1948, the year of Israel's establishment, rather than the Six-Day War.

Does this mean, in Palestinian eyes, that the conflict is territorial or existential?

Sixth, did you notice the comment of the Palestinian ambassador to Lebanon, Abdullah Abdullah, as reported the other day in Lebanon's Daily Star?

The ambassador said, “even Palestinian refugees who are living in [refugee camps] inside the [Palestinian] state, they are still refugees. They will not be considered citizens.”

In other words, he said, the new Palestinian state would “absolutely not” be issuing passports to Palestinian refugees.

Did the PA reject his comment? If so, I missed it.

And if a new Palestinian state is not the answer to the Palestinian refugee issue, then what exactly is?

Seventh, in Brazil, the Palestinian ambassador there, Alzebin Ibrahim, was quoted in the prominent magazine Veja-Brazil as saying to a contingent of university students that “Israel should disappear,” expressing his preference for the final outcome. Did you catch it?

Again, if the PA repudiated the ambassador's words, it escaped me.

Eighth, you note that the “Palestinians are divided,” but fail to mention the PA-Hamas reconciliation agreement or in any other way address how the Hamas factor is to be addressed in the context of the current diplomatic imbroglio.

Skipping it, however, won't make it go away – and it's not a minor matter, either.

Ninth, you omit any reference to another PA action that raises questions about prospects for peace – glorification of Palestinian terrorists.

Among the most glaring examples of late was the visit earlier this year by a PA cabinet minister, Issa Karake, to the family of Abbas Al-Sayed.

Al-Sayed was the Hamas mastermind of the terrorist attack on a Passover Seder in Netanya, an Israeli coastal city. Thirty people were killed in the assault. On March 28, 2011, Isake presented Al-Sayed's family with a commemorative plaque marking the ninth anniversary of the carnage.

If cold-blooded murderers are to be lionized by the PA, does this advance the prospects of peaceful conflict resolution?

And finally, as Prime Minister Netanyahu has said more than once, if the PA were to recognize the goal of two states for two peoples, then, from Israel's viewpoint, the way would be paved for a speedy breakthrough.

But President Abbas can't acknowledge the link between Israel and the Jewish people, i.e., the inherent legitimacy of the state. In fact, he's made clear he won't.

How does that stance help inspire confidence to move the peace process forward?

Respectfully, the Israeli people don't need lectures on the imperatives of peace. After 63 years, I assure you, they understand what the absence of peace means far better than you and I do.

But they also know, to borrow a phrase from the Pulitzer Prize-winning author Robert Caro in another context, that “the press's misunderstanding was merely the wish's predilection to be father to the thought.”

Perhaps a clearer understanding of the realities on the ground might have steered you away from your own wishful thinking – and one-sided spin.

The opinions expressed in the comment section are the personal views of the commenters. Comments are moderated, so please keep it civil.

Visitor Comments: 14

(13)
Anonymous,
October 15, 2011 7:05 PM

We have to thank G_D for people like Mr. Kristoff and Mr. Obama
they are the ones who have kept our people strong and never giving our fight for the truth that apparently they refuse to see...
G_D BLESS ISRAEL

(12)
Christina,
October 13, 2011 8:58 PM

Response to Kristoff

I too hope this gets forwarded to Kristoff. Like him, I am an Oregonian and have appreciated his books. But how he views Israel is so uninformed and wrong.
Israel has suffered more than 10,000 rocket attacks from the Palestinians. Can you imagine the U.S. response if Mexico or Canada fired even one at us?
I think Netanyahu's comment that asking Israel to negotiate with Hamas is like asking the U.S. to negotiate with Al Queida

(11)
Miriam,
October 13, 2011 6:31 PM

Many years ago you interviewed me in Los Angeles on teh subject of animal behaviour and the resolution of psychological problems of pets. You were intelligent, sensitive, sensible, accurate and impartial.
What happened to you?

(10)
ARTHUR PALGON,
October 11, 2011 5:50 PM

Great column, but I doubt if Kristof gets it.
The NY times has it's own agenda and Kristofis part of it.

(9)
Don Rosenberg,
October 11, 2011 5:33 PM

No 2nd state for the arabs, they have jordan !!

Mr. Harris's comments are good but not strong enough.
Like most Jewish organizations, he is too PC and not passionate in attacking the arabs and their racism and refusal to negotiate. The entire hate against Israel is about racism by muslims, plain and simple. No one will discuss this. In 1967 the Israeli's should have kicked out all the arabs from Judea/samaria, but we are too nice and not selfish like the racist arabs. The past 63 years shows me the arabs want to destroy Israel and they want the conflict to unite all of them to
defer their own countries problems. The time is not to tell the arabs peace on Israel's terms or no 2nd pal......
If they refuse prepare to wipe them out, because they would do that to us Jews.

Frank,
October 12, 2011 4:31 AM

Negotiation Skills

I could not agree more with Rosenberg (except the wipe out part, which I don't wish on anyone). And I would add: the only reason people support the Arabs is exactly because they refuse a 2-state solution (even if they pay lip service to it in public). They make themselves look like the woman who would rather give up the baby than see it split in 2. Whereas we look like we are willing to split the baby. If for nothing else, just as a negotiating tactic our leaders should maintain our right to ALL of J&S & Yerushalayim. I personally believe that giving land won't get us any more than it got us at Gaza but even the liberals should support that stance because IT WORKS! Just ask the UN !!!

(8)
paul g,
October 11, 2011 3:22 PM

Should be sent to the Times

I agree with most of this, which should be published in the Times and sent personally to Mr. Kristof, and I'm not Jewish.

(7)
David,
October 11, 2011 1:53 PM

Good article.

Very well argued. I find very little to like about Nicholas Kristof, but will admit to some admiration for his consistency-- I find that he is on the wrong side of just about every issue on which he writes. To paraphrase P.J. O'Rourke, Kristof is like the butt end of the needle on one's moral compass.

(6)
ruth housman,
October 11, 2011 1:44 PM

for every mistake we must surely be learning

a quote from Lennon's Still My Guitar Gently Weeps
There can be no negotiation with anyone who claims openly that the Israelis should be wiped out. How could there be any such thing as, negotiation? Does anyone truly trust another person who is openly or even covertly, hating you, as The Enemy?
The Gaza Strip is a festering wound, that is not a Gaza Strip, as in gauze strip, meaning Band Aid, and the true Band Aid in this entire Middle East Conflict has got to be sides coming together and not apart, as in "jamming together" as in a Jam Sandwich, about sweet, not bitter. Because we have all tasted bitter for too too long, and that's not the recipe for charosets.
We are entering a New Year, and we are saying to each other Shana Tova! What's hidden behind the smile of the Cheshire cat, has got to be a story with a Promising Ending, that has to be about PEACE, that elusive, quantity, that still eludes us all, and I would say, Israelis, above all, seek peace, seek love, and seek and end to this constant upset, which means in saying good-bye each and every morning, there is no guarantee that child, that beloved person will return. There is nothing positive about immolation that kills innocent people, and this does NOT lead to peace, but to increasing enmity. If this is The Goal, then it's achieved. The Gaol in all of this is that what's imprisoning itself over and over again, is the prism, that says, let's do it, as rainbows do, and hold hands across the Divide, before we get hopelessly lost. Mercy, both sides now, let's turn it into Merci, a thanksgiving.
Shana Tova, Israel!

(5)
Jossef Perl,
October 11, 2011 12:55 PM

Nicholas Kristof Wily Arrogance

I read Nicholas Kristof's column and wrote the NY Times about it. Nicholas Kristof's column is both arrogant and cunning. It is arrogant in its patronizing attitude that suggest that he understands better Israel's interests than the Israeli government. It is cunning is that he pretends to be concerned about Israel committing suicide. His column shows that he is one of those who would like nothing better than see a one-state solution that will make Israel dissapear tomorrow. Unlike David Harris, I agree with Elie Wiesel that Old Jerusalem is above politics and is not negotiable. Jerusalem is the heart of Jewish people and was a Jewish Capital when London was only a swamp and Washington DC was only a forest.

(4)
jack w zuckerman,
October 11, 2011 12:22 PM

well done, unbiased and to the point..

thank you Mr. Harris

(3)
Frank Adam,
October 11, 2011 12:14 PM

if the judge's summing up is not fair it is cause for appeal

Those so sedulously zealous criticising Israel should review their scripts applying their strictures to the Arab parties every time Israel is mentioned.
If the strictures also apply to the Arab parties they should have the guts to say so or leave the stage.
One of the reasons for why World War II broke out as it did in Europe was because the press took a notion that the Hitler government would be satisfied with the particular pieces of territory which really - if they had read Hittler's book and speeches - were only coathangers for an excuse to be generally aggressive.
It is time for all editors to re-read Articles 29 and 30 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights and a very similar form of words in Art 17 of the European Declaration of Human Rights which forbid the misuse of anything in the said declarations to support actions against the aims and purposes of the UN. The idea also goes back to the original French Declaration of the Rights of Man, Art 4.
Well the Arabs defied the UN and rejected UN 181 and have since 1947 rejected the idea of a two state solution to Palestine's quarrels with Israel's very existence in any frontiers. Accordingly editors would do well to remember that soccer and Rugby - and I do not see why American Football will be any different - all referee on "advantage rules": if somebody fouls and by chance the opposition derives advantage from the foul then the referee is not to stop the game unduly.

(2)
Dave A.,
October 11, 2011 11:47 AM

Wasted effort?

I fear that these "open letters" are a huge waste of time and effort. Kristof and those like him never reply and never acknowledge views contrary to their own. They have set their agendas and will not be budged from them, no matter what happens or does not happen.

(1)
Kerry,
October 11, 2011 11:39 AM

Beward of Greeks bearing gifts. *cliche"

I started to mistrust, then downright dislike Kristoff when he wantered from child slavery into Middle-Eastern affairs. He has become a frightening bigot. He is frightening because he does not realize he is bigoted.
Also, beware of Abbas; Abbas is far more dangerous than any Hamas leader, even Nasrallah.

I've been striving to get more into spirituality. But it seems that every time I make some progress, I find myself slipping right back to where I started. I'm getting discouraged and feel like a failure. Can you help?

The Aish Rabbi Replies:

Spiritual slumps are a natural part of spiritual growth. There is a cycle that people go through when at times they feel closer to God and at times more distant. In the words of the Kabbalists, it is "two steps forward and one step back." So although you feel you are slipping, know that this is a natural process. The main thing is to look at your overall progress (over months or years) and be able to see how far you've come!

This is actually God's ingenious way of motivating us further. The sages compare this to teaching a baby how to walk. When the parent is holding on, the baby shrieks with delight and is under the illusion that he knows how to walk. Yet suddenly, when the parent lets go, the child panics, wobbles and may even fall.

At such times when we feel spiritually "down," that is often because God is letting go, giving us the great gift of independence. In some ways, these are the times when we can actually grow the most. For if we can move ourselves just a little bit forward, we truly acquire a level of sanctity that is ours forever.

Here is a practical tool to help pull you out of the doldrums. The Sefer HaChinuch speaks about a great principle in spiritual growth: "The external awakens the internal." This means that although we may not experience immediate feelings of closeness to God, eventually, by continuing to conduct ourselves in such a manner, this physical behavior will have an impact on our spiritual selves and will help us succeed. (A similar idea is discussed by psychologists who say: "Smile and you will feel happy.")

That is the power of Torah commandments. Even if we may not feel like giving charity or praying at this particular moment, by having a "mitzvah" obligation to do so, we are in a framework to become inspired. At that point we can infuse that act of charity or prayer with all the meaning and lift it can provide. But if we'd wait until being inspired, we might be waiting a very long time.

May the Almighty bless you with the clarity to see your progress, and may you do so with joy.

In 1940, a boatload 1,600 Jewish immigrants fleeing Hitler's ovens was denied entry into the port of Haifa; the British deported them to the island of Mauritius. At the time, the British had acceded to Arab demands and restricted Jewish immigration into Palestine. The urgent plight of European Jewry generated an "illegal" immigration movement, but the British were vigilant in denying entry. Some ships, such as the Struma, sunk and their hundreds of passengers killed.

If you seize too much, you are left with nothing. If you take less, you may retain it (Rosh Hashanah 4b).

Sometimes our appetites are insatiable; more accurately, we act as though they were insatiable. The Midrash states that a person may never be satisfied. "If he has one hundred, he wants two hundred. If he gets two hundred, he wants four hundred" (Koheles Rabbah 1:34). How often have we seen people whose insatiable desire for material wealth resulted in their losing everything, much like the gambler whose constant urge to win results in total loss.

People's bodies are finite, and their actual needs are limited. The endless pursuit for more wealth than they can use is nothing more than an elusive belief that they can live forever (Psalms 49:10).

The one part of us which is indeed infinite is our neshamah (soul), which, being of Divine origin, can crave and achieve infinity and eternity, and such craving is characteristic of spiritual growth.

How strange that we tend to give the body much more than it can possibly handle, and the neshamah so much less than it needs!